This site is a reference point for those with a cool head for climate science, arguably the most political science ever. This site is and always will be advert free and I do not expect you to pay me. When the government and most of the media concentrate on alarmism, this site is the antidote for those who don't believe the scare stories - YOU ARE NOT ALONE! (blog started on 7/11/07)

Monday, 31 December 2012

This article refers to the hypothesis that the CFC gases that are blamed for causing the hole in the ozone layer could have also caused the warming which occurred in the 1980's and 90's. The argument for this is certainly well made and deserves consideration, at least as much as the CO2 hypothesis.

Sunday, 30 December 2012

Here is a link to the article written by a professor. I understand he is an Australian living in Austria and his musings about how to treat leading "deniers" of the seriousness of global warming were put on his university website. Of course he should be treated as a deranged nutcase, but he is a professor and so some impressionable people will no doubt take notice of him. What if one person acts on his suggestion, will the prof. be held responsible?
UPDATE: The author has now removed the article entirely and posted an apology Post in haste, repent at leisure. Happy New Year everyone!

Friday, 28 December 2012

Here Matt Ridley responds to criticism of his post that I referred to on 20th December. It is interesting to see how cut throat the climate science business is. Looking at Matt's response it seems to me that he has given a very robust rebuttal, but when two scientists "lock horns" it is easy to see how the layman is left confused.

Thursday, 27 December 2012

Wednesday, 26 December 2012

This piece on Donna Laframboise's blog explains how the IPCC ensures that scientific papers that support the narrative they espouse get into their report, even if they have not yet been published in a scientific journal. Of course we are already aware that many of their lead authors do their best to prevent any papers opposing their view from getting published at all, and certainly kept out of the IPCC report altogether. I refer, of course to the leaked emails known as climategate. here is a good article which discusses the climategate isue in relation to the way science is treated in universities today.

Tuesday, 25 December 2012

I wish all readers a merry Christmas and let's hope for a New Year in which our governments open their eyes to the reality of the lack of warming and stop pouring billions of taxpayers' money away in a fruitless attempt to solve a non-problem.

Monday, 24 December 2012

This article on WUWT blog gives a very simple analysis of the predictions of global warming from all the four past IPCC reports from 1990. After 22 years it is now obvious that they are hopelessly wrong. How long can this discredited nonsense go on?

Sunday, 23 December 2012

Taxpayers subsidising wind turbines are getting an even worse deal than many realise according to this article. The main findings are that their life-expectancy is only 10 to 15 years instead of the 25 years quoted by the wind industry, also they become less efficient as they get older. All this means that the government need a lot more of them to try to replace the traditional fossil fuel generation (if we ignore their intermittency - which we can't). What it ought to mean is that we simply don't need them and we can't afford them.

Saturday, 22 December 2012

Here is an article which looks at the recommendations in a report into the work of the IPCC and it finds that the IPCC appears to have ignored them, according to the leaked draft of the next report, due out at the end of 2013. With such close scrutiny now on the IPCC, they will be in for a very hard time unless they get their act together.

Friday, 21 December 2012

This article looks at a new scientific paper about the Chinese climate. The article also links to much more evidence which builds up a more or less global picture of the medieval warm period that was warmer than today.

Thursday, 20 December 2012

The headline ought to be good news and yet it seems highly probable that the IPCC will try and hide this. The detail is in this piece by Matt Ridley. One of the good things about the recent leak of the draft IPCC report is that if (or when) they try to dress it up in alarmist language we will have much more time to prepare and counter their scare stories.

Wednesday, 19 December 2012

The well-respected Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) chaired by the UK's former Chancelor of the Exchequer, Lord Lawson, has decided to write to the new head of the BBC Trust to call for a new seminar to examine the BBC's policy on climate change coverage. The letter can be read here. It will be interesting to see the Trust's response, in view of the fact that so much has happened since 2007 when the last major policy review took place.

Tuesday, 18 December 2012

Here's an interesting piece of news about what's happening in the Maldives. Although their leaders constantly complain that their islands are about to disappear under the sea, we note in the article that they are about to build four new airports to improve things for the tourists. Me thinks they do protest too much.

Monday, 17 December 2012

This piece by the excellent Donna Laframboise shows how the IPCC chairman's claim that the reports issued by the IPCC are thoroughly reviewed by thousands of independent experts is in fact a myth, as the reports can be altered after the reviews are done.

Friday, 14 December 2012

Yes astonishingly that seems to be the conclusion according to the scientist who leaked the whole second draft of the report. Read the whole article on WUWT here. Here is a paragraph from the post:
"The admission of strong evidence for enhanced solar forcing changes everything. The climate alarmists can’t continue to claim that warming was almost entirely due to human activity over a period when solar warming effects, now acknowledged to be important, were at a maximum. The final draft of AR5 WG1 is not scheduled to be released for another year but the public needs to know now how the main premises and conclusions of the IPCC story line have been undercut by the IPCC itself."

Thursday, 13 December 2012

Yet more corruption seems to be happening according to this report. This kind of thing has happende time after time and yet our politicians seem to have no other option while we all continue to get ripped off.

Wednesday, 12 December 2012

Last evening I watched a programme on Britain's Extreme Weather. It is still available to view on computer (see this link). As I expected it was a one-sided piece of climate change propaganda dressed up as a normal documentary. It began by showing all the various different "extremes" of weather, particularly highlighting the flooding events around the country. I recall no mention of the fact that these all occurred in flood plains or in places surrounded by steep hills. There was no serious attempt to look in detail at the records for rainfall. A couple of harsh winters from the past were mentioned to try to give an impression of balance.

All this was leading to the obvious conclusion which appeared in the last 15 minutes of the hour long programme - man made CO2 was the culprit and two climate scientists of a "warmist" persuasion appeared to warn us that things were likely to get a lot worse. Funnily enough no one bothered to mention that there has been no statistically significant global warming for 16 years despite CO2 levels continuing to rise. Naturally no one was invited on who had any alternative views. This was clearly aimed at those with no knowledge other than the prevailing orthodoxy. As it was on Channel 4 it probably had quite small audience. In view of the mounting evidence that global warming has stopped for the past 16 years I wonder if there will be any attempt to look at this?

Tuesday, 11 December 2012

This report looks at the details. While the green activists would no doubt agree with this analysis, there are still a number of costly measures that Western governments are committed to do. Only when these are scrapped will we start to get back to common sense on this issue.

Monday, 10 December 2012

This report gives a flavour of the nonsense being cooked up to fleece us all. Heaven help us if this lot are on our side. For a round-up of the final decisions go to this link at the BBC and if you read it you may conclude that the charade goes on, though fortnately at a snail's pace. Maybe by 2015 the world may have cooled and even the zealots will struggle to keep this gravy train on the rails.

Friday, 7 December 2012

This excellent piece from James Delingpole looks at how the media, particularly the BBC, are willing to report anything written by the green NGO's, even though it is easily proved to be one-sided propaganda. Shame on them.

Thursday, 6 December 2012

£2 billion in aid from the UK is being mis-used according to this article in the Telegraph. Not only is it unnecessary as there is no adverse trend in climate, but as usual the aid is not even reaching the poorest anyway. How typical!

Wednesday, 5 December 2012

The following is a list of the guidance rules by which the BBC expects its staff to deal with articles concerning the climate change debate. To read the full article giving the background go to this link Surely this turns the BBC from an impartial provider of news a into propaganda machine for indoctrinating the public?
Those ten points are:

1. Journalists must resist framing the debate by putting up pro AGW advocates against climate sceptics.

2. Such an approach creates an impression of balance but in fact demonstrates that ‘balance is bias’ …against the consensus and therefore wrong.

3. It is important to train new, young journalists in a new approach to climate change because they will then either take that with them to the higher ranks of the BBC or move to other media organisations where they can then have influence over how the science is covered.

4. Journalists must now present the science as a long term ‘process’ and not look for a ‘result’….do not debate the science…facts are not necessary.

5. It is the Media’s role and responsibility to ensure the Public get the correct message about the science so that they then proceed to behave ‘dutifully’ in response.

6. Sceptics lack the knowledge and scientific background to be qualified to challenge the consensus.

7. Climate sceptics put in danger both Democracy and the Planet…..turn the debate into a ‘morality play’….guilt is good.

8. There needs to be a new kind of reporting….as said science as a ‘process’ but also introduce new voices….ignore the science, look at the consequences of global warming and the necessary responses….bring on economists, historians, politicians, social scientists and businessmen who will ensure the Public are made fully aware of the dangers of climate change according to the consensus.

9. Blur the boundaries between news and current affairs and other broadcast categories…drama, history, wildlife documentaries, anything that will further opportunities to influence the viewer’s perceptions and understanding of climate change.

10. There are no more facts to be found…the science is settled…..that is now the ‘Orthodoxy’.

Tuesday, 4 December 2012

This article explains the new study and its significance. I hope everyone will sleep easier knowing there is still no prospect of major sea level rise in the foreseeable future. I hope the UN will take note (though I doubt they are listening).

Saturday, 1 December 2012

This report looks at the latest attempt by the WWF to extract yet more cash from the rich west to give to the poor in order for them to deal with the effects of climate change. This despite the fact that no climate event can be attributed to CO2.

Friday, 30 November 2012

This article in the Telegraph looks at the new announcement in the forthcoming Energy Bill. It is good news for energy intensive industries, but the bad news is the rest of us will have to pay the extra to make up for it. So our bill will go even higher.

Wednesday, 28 November 2012

Tuesday, 27 November 2012

Here is an article which refers to the report and links to it. It gives a cautious conclusion that shale gas would make a difference to the UK, and is all the more believable for not going over the top. All we are waiting for is the goverment to give the go ahead.

Monday, 26 November 2012

Dear old Prince Charles seems to be going ott with his latest speech according to this article in the Independent. On many issues I share his concern, but on this one I beg to differ. It is sad that by so over-stating the argument he will merely re-inforce the views of those who find him an eccentric.

Sunday, 25 November 2012

Here is the link to the Guardian poll, so do let them have your opinion. Poll closes in about 5 hours.

UPDATE
Poll has now closed and the result was 31% in favour and 69% against, which seems rather convincing evidence that the public do not want dearer electricity, even if it were to cut CO2 (which it would not).

This piece from Bishop Hill looks at why the BBC has got it so wrong on the climate debate. By giving up on impartiality the BBC has betrayed its viewers and listeners, and sold out to the green lobby. A public service broadcaster that has done the public a disservice.

Saturday, 24 November 2012

This piece explains the bad news contained in the UK government's new energy bill. It's not all bad news as the government did at least not include a new CO2 reduction target that would have ruled out new gas fired power stations without carbon capture, so the door has been left open to start devloping shale gas.

Friday, 23 November 2012

Just when you thought you had read all the wind farm scams along comes this. You really could not make it up. How could the government fail to see this and do something to stop it? Unfortunately this is just typical of what happens when an artificial market is devised, instead of allowing real competition.

This report tells us why no meaningful agreement will be reached. The major sticking point is simple - the so-called "develoing nations such as China and India refuse to subject themselves to reducing their emissions, and the USA, Canada, New Zealand and others refuse to take part in an agreement that does not include them. A classic impasse which looks insoluble. Without all major industrial nations taking part CO2 emission cuts cannot happen.

Thursday, 22 November 2012

This article confirms the headline, which suggests that the hype about climate change causing wars was likely to be an exaggeration, like so much of the climate change hype. Gradually governments are beginning to back off from the collective madness that has engulfed them.

Wednesday, 21 November 2012

Here is a very good piece about the way the IPCC goes about its business, not its scientific business, but its everyday organisational business. The article looks at two matters; the award of the Nobel Peace Prize is one, and its presence at the latest UN climate change talks is the other. In both cases they seem to be more than a little confused.

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

This piece uncovers a hidden link between the BBC's pension fund and promotion of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis. Something that I have never heard the BBC declare, and nor do I expect them to do so anytime soon.

Monday, 19 November 2012

According to Matt ridley not only will they fail to reduce emissions, but they will increase food prices as well as energy costs - a real lose-lose scenario. Yet the UK and the EU still persist with the policy.

Sunday, 18 November 2012

This article from Christopher Booker (where would the UK climate sceptics be without him?) gives the wider public an opportunity to see how the BBC has abandoned its duty of impartiality at the behest of a one-sided group of climate alarmist organisations. This disgraceful bias is yet more evidence of a lack of integrity by the public service broadcaster. Apart from Booker no other national media has reported this, as far as I am aware.

Here is more on this topic with detail of the little known IBT which seems to wield a lot of power over the media.

Saturday, 17 November 2012

This article highlights new UK Energy Minister, John Hayes strong objections to wind farms. It is hard to imagine that PM David Cameron was unaware of this when he appointed him in the recent re-shuffle.

Friday, 16 November 2012

This article discusses the rift at the heart of the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition over the new Energy Bill. What the article reveals is that the Conservatives are at last realising that the targets in the Climate Change Act are actually incompatible with keeping the lights on. The hard bit is trying to explain this to their Lib Dem partners.

Thursday, 15 November 2012

When you read this article you can see why so many nations are keen (even desperate) to see climate change taken seriously. It's because they expect to get billions of dollars to fight it. If (or when) it eventually falls flat not one single dollar will be repaid. It is simply the ultimate ponzi scheme. This is a benefits culture on a world scale, not just a client state, but dependent nations. Of course it has many facets and when temperatures continue to flatline or even fall the focus will switch to sea level rise or increasing acidity in the ocean, or something yet to be mentioned. The developed world is beginning to wise up and smell the coffee.

Wednesday, 14 November 2012

You can read the full story and the list here on the WUWT website. This has been a bad wekk for the BBC, but I bet this will not make the national news, yet it is more clear evidence that the BBC is far from impartial in its reporting of the contentious issue of so-called "climate change. What can the BBC be trusted on?

Monday, 12 November 2012

Here's an account of a Labour Peer questioning the extent of temperature rise since 1880, with the detailed reply given by the government, probably with some help from the Climate Research Unit. It is interesting to read the comments below the post as some are very sharp. It is looking as though the sceptics are growing both in numbers and confidence.

Sunday, 11 November 2012

The Tax Payer's Alliance has done some research and discovered that our political leaders who keep on exalting us to forsake such high emission things as air travel have been quietly bumping up their air miles. Is anyone surprised? Of course not, after all their travel is so much more important than ours!

Saturday, 10 November 2012

This article looks at the facts and makes the case against tropical storm Sandy being affected by man-made climate change. Yet the alarmists cannot resist trying - it is just too tempting not to use all the pain and suffering from the storm to advance their "cause", despite all the evidence pointing to them being wrong. Yet another desperate attempt to bolster their very weak case.

Friday, 9 November 2012

This article explains how the New Zealand government has backed off from having a high price for carbon emissions, thus giving its industry a head start over others like the UK and Australia. I notice one interesting line in the linked article which says that Australians had given their government a mandate to have a carbon trading scheme. That is the opposite of my recollection. Once one or two countries start to break ranks with the carbon taxing nations it won't be long before others join them.

Thursday, 8 November 2012

This article from Christopher Booker shows him in upbeat mood about the recent rebellious noises from our MPs, both on wind farms and also the wretched EU budget. It may be a faltering first step, but at least it seems to be in the right direction.

Wednesday, 7 November 2012

This article by UKIP MEP, Roger Helmer, looks at the current supplies and reserves of fossil fuels and finds that far from running out, there are ample supplies for the foreseeable future, which means that they are not likely to rocket in price, thus making renewables appear to be comparable. On the contrary it is the renewables which are going to be the costly option, but will our political leaders have the good sense to change course?

Here is another well-argued article by Ruth Lea who looks at why the UK needs to stop building wind farms and concentrate on gas.

Monday, 5 November 2012

I sometimes come across "old news" stories that catch my eye and I think they deserve to be highlighted for some reason that makes them current. Here is one. I feel in one way I should say good luck to Mr Dale - my only misgiving is that he should not have been given the chance to fleece the government, and hence all of us.

Saturday, 3 November 2012

A new film has been made by activists against wind farms. If you view it you will see that it is a very professional piece of work. The opposition to wind farms is increasing the more people see of them and the more they learn of the weakness of the case for them.

Friday, 2 November 2012

Six years ago the BBC decided to stop giving any right of reply to those sceptical of the global warming hypothesis. The decision was made as a result of a meeting with a panel of climate "experts". A climate sceptic blogger has doggedly pursued a freedom of information request to get the BBC to reveal the names of the expert panel. Here is an account of the long and dogged pursuit.

Wednesday, 31 October 2012

This diagram from Scottish Power shows clearly where the biggest share of the price increase is coming from - you've guessed it - the government's various green subsidy schemes. Yet this is never made clear when these price increases are discussed on the news. It's always blamed on the increase in the cost of gas.

Tuesday, 30 October 2012

The IPCC is supposedly the last word in balanced science and transparency etc. Yet one of its leading science authors has been discovered to be a candidate for the Green Party of Canada according to this article by Donna Laframboise. Why do the IPCC think they can get away with this?

Monday, 29 October 2012

This piece from Steyn's blog focuses on Mann's insistence that he has been awarded a Nobel prize; a point which is disputed by the Nobel committee. Mann has announced his intention to sue Steyn for defaming him. He seems to be getting off to a poor start before even entering a court.

Sunday, 28 October 2012

This report looks at how the latest price increase from EDF energy is justified by the company. The conclusion is that most of it is caused, not by the rise in fuel price, but by the government interfering in the industry and insisting on increasing amounts of renewable energy being used.

More evidence of this is in this article which looks at the complex web of taxes and emissions trading costs which will be passed on to customers.

Friday, 26 October 2012

Cllr. Nick Clarke, the Leader of Cambridgeshire County Council has continued to post sceptic articles about global warming on his blog. This one contains a huge list of comments from sceptic scientists. Other posts are followed by a fierce debate between sceptics and warmists.

Thursday, 25 October 2012

This piece from the GWPF by Prof gordon Hughes shows us just why we are on the wrong track in relying on more and more wind turbines for our future energy policy. Christopher Booker also highlighted this subject in his latest piece in Sunday's Telegraph. The public are now strongly divided on this issue and as bills go on rising, those opposed will surely increase.

Tuesday, 23 October 2012

This article from the Mail looks at the data and includes quotes from Judith Curry and Phil Jones. Although the figures were not widely reported in the media, there is no doubt they are genuine. All the alarmists can say is that 16 years is not long enough to show a clear trend, but it is all the direct evidence we have. Those who cry "alarm, catastrophe", have no direct evidence to back it up. Time for more humility from the alarmists, I think.

Update - This Sunday The Mail did a full double page spread follow up article answering their critics. It seems the mainstream media are at last seriously questioning the whole global warming hypothesis.

Monday, 22 October 2012

This article shows how the carbon trading bureaucracy got even more complex as companies seek to minimise their costs as the price of off-sets falls to new lows. While some traders are, no doubt, getting rich on all this it is the ordinary citizen who is paying the price in dearer goods and services.

Sunday, 21 October 2012

This clip shows the sceptics seriously outnumbered by green activists in a recent demonstration at the UK Treasury in London. Well done to those few who put up a brave show, including Piers Corbin and Fay Kelly-Tuncay the leaders of the "Scrap the Climate Change Act" campaign. There is a large silent majority in the UK who have not yet understood the serious consequences of following the green agenda. They will soon begin to understand that it is causing high energy prices and costing jobs. We may then see the green activists outnumbered.

Saturday, 20 October 2012

A UK council leader has spoken out against anthropogenic global warming. Here is an article from the local paper in which he explained his position. Good to see other councillors are now speaking up for common sense.
UPDATE - You can Read Cllr Clarke's blog here

Friday, 19 October 2012

The details are in an article on ,Bishop Hill Blog, though having read the blog article as well as looking at the linked article on Business Green, I am still unclear, along with most of the commenters beneath the BH article.
I can perfectly well understand what a feed-in-tariff is when applied to a consumer generating electricity and feeding it into the grid, but this seems to apply not to electricity generated, but electricity "saved" by the consumer purchasing some more efficient item such as low-energy light bulbs. What is not clear is exactly how the "saving" is calculated. Is it done by some formula, in which case there may not be any actual saving at all? The consumer might, for example, decide to leave all his lights on for much longer. The "saving" could be calculated by looking at his actual usage, but he could be saving electricity because, for example, his washing machine has packed up and he is doing his washing at a friend's house. Can anyone throw any light on this, or is it simply as daft as I think?

Thursday, 18 October 2012

This lecture is a very good one on the details of how clouds may be responsible for the changes in temperature of the planet. This research is not given nearly enough coverage in the global warming debate simply because it does not conform to the so-called consensus on CO2 being the cause.

Tuesday, 16 October 2012

This piece by MEP Roger Helmer sums up the situation here in the UK where the coalition are desparately worried about the possibility of power cuts in about 3 years, and yet the Labour opposition are trying to force them to remain on course to keep to their CO2 emission reduction targets at all costs. Will anyone save us?

Monday, 15 October 2012

Here is a very interesting account of the way that computer climate models have tried to predict the trend in sea surface temperatures. The comparisons with the actual measurements make rather uncomfortable reading for the modelers who need to be very modest about their work. They certainly cannot claim a high degree of certainty about their predictions so far, so why should we believe any long term predictions they make?

Sunday, 14 October 2012

The UK government started a competition 4 years ago to build a working power station that operated a carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) facility. At the end of the time nothing had been achieved and this scathing report is what the National Audit Office thought of it. Now we learn that our Climate Change Minister is giving away another £20 million for more research into said CCS.

Friday, 12 October 2012

This article by Matt Ridley looks at how the IPCC operates in such a way that they set out to confirm the hypothesis of CO2 causing catastrophic global warming by allowing no contrary ideas to be examined. It is the very opposite of the scientific method in which a hypothesis should be examined in a critical way. Every student should see this and so should our politicians.

Thursday, 11 October 2012

Joanne Nova has pulled together all the evidence to show that the hypothesis of man made global warming is disproved. See the article here. The link is unequivocal and has many references to back it up. Definitely a tour de force.

Wednesday, 10 October 2012

Well known writer and climate sceptic James Delingpole is standing as a candidate in the forthcoming Corby and Northants by-election which takes place on 15th November. He is standing on a platform of opposing the building of Wind Farms. Here is his latest blog post on this. I doubt he has any chance of winning but he will certainly throw a spotlight on the many drawbacks to relying on wind to power us in the 21st century.

Tuesday, 9 October 2012

Here is an interesting piece by Donna Laframboise on her No Frakking Consensus blog. It is another example to show what sort of future we could have if these people get their way. The question is, will they get their way? Personally I doubt it, as long as we can elect our politicians I don't believe they would dare to go as far as rationing our use of cars or electricity. If they did they would not last long in the job.

Monday, 8 October 2012

This article looks at the correlation between exploding stars and climate change. The results apparently show that there could be a connection. More evidence that cosmic rays can affect cloud cover which in turn warms or cools the earth.

Sunday, 7 October 2012

Now at last the warnings of possible power cuts for the UK are being made by Ofgem the official organisation that regulates our energy supplies. This has been on the cards for some years as a result of EU regulations to cut CO2 emissions to "save the planet". Now we face a greatly increased possibility of blackouts and all that goes with that, including freezing cold, in just three years time. The government that presides over this will reap a whole lot of abuse and oblivion at the ballot box. They must be praying for some mild winters.

Friday, 5 October 2012

This piece on the revived Jo Nova Blog covers the story of how Al Gore's people tried to buy the use of some footage of a firestorm, and got knocked back by the owner who thought it inappropriate for it to be used to further the climate alarmist cause. Good for him!

Thursday, 4 October 2012

This article in the Daily Mail reveals that large payments have been made to wind farms to get them to stop producing electricity when high winds are forecast in order to balance the grid. These payments have been kept hidden from the public, as obviously they will only further reduce the publics confidence in these expensive and pointless monuments to government's folly.

Wednesday, 3 October 2012

One man who commands great respect in the world of climate science is Professor John Christy. His testimony runs to 36 pages, but is a clear and rational account of the current situation. He looks at extreme weather events and puts the recent ones in perspective compared with the last century of data. Christy's testimony is a tour de force which calmly shows where alarmists have failed to prove their case.

Tuesday, 2 October 2012

Apparently some sections of the world's press have given prominence to something called the Dara Report. I have not seen it myself, but I have read This piece by Bjorn Lomborg, who although he accepts that climate change is a problem, gives the report a thorough debunking. It makes me wonder why these alarmist organisations bother to produce such propaganda in the first place. Perhaps they hope that the headline will be bigger than the debunking, and they are probably right to do so. However in the long run their lies and distortions will find them out.

Monday, 1 October 2012

Here is a fascinating look at a large number of press reports of weather events across the world going back through the past century. The reports along with other data give strong evidence that extreme weather is, if anything, less common today than in the records of the past century. It certainly shows conclusively that the present weather is no more extreme and in no way unprecedented.

Sunday, 30 September 2012

This piece shows what alarmists want, and it is to allow no non-consenting voices to be heard on the subject of global warming. It is a clear sign of how frightened they are that the arguments put by their opponents are too strong to combat. But however hard they try, those arguments will be heard, if not on mainstream TV then they will be in the press or on the internet. If those arguments have merit they will win in the end.

Two good articles on Eureferendum blog.The first one looks at a project in Denmark where the energy supply to a small village is over 50% from renewables, mainly wind turbines. It makes rather disturbing reading, as it relies on the customers only using appliances when the energy can be supplied - in other words taking a step backwards.The second one looks at how the energy market is being rigged to enable wind turbines to get added to the grid in such large numbers. The second piece looks at how a rigged market is leading us to the situation where we may end up in the position of the citizens of the Danish village.

All this is being promoted by our government as "progress" and yet it can only be called progress in some kind of "nu-speak" world where words take on an entirely different meaning - a bit like calling a same-sex relationship "marriage" (which the government are also proposing).

Saturday, 29 September 2012

Remember the one about methane escaping from the ocean floor and increasing the warming? Well according to this piece in Watts Up With That blog a new scientific expedition has discovered that these vents have been going on for many years and are not likely to be linked to human activity or emissions of CO2. Don't have nightmares and do sleep well!

Friday, 28 September 2012

It is a complex question as this report to the UK parliament makes clear. What's more, no proper answer has been published by the UK government, so despite the massive cost of adding all the wind turbines to the UK there is no official way of knowing whether the savings are worthwhile, or indeed if there are any savings at all. In this piece on the Bishop Hill blog there is an account of a councillor in Scotland who is taking a case to UNECE against the authorities behind the wind farm policy (the EU and the UK) on the very point of inadequate information about CO2 savings among others. She has already won the right to have her case put and a ruling is expected next summer. If she wins it would be a fantastic victory, but I am not holding my breath.

Thursday, 27 September 2012

This article by Matt Ridley looks at other evidence coming forward to suggest that the Arctic ice has been much greater as well as smaller than the present. The alarmists want to give only one side of the story.

Wednesday, 26 September 2012

This piece from Christopher Booker gives a clear warning of what we in the UK will face if we continue to add more and more wind power to the grid. Yet despite all the evidence our government seems determined to press ahead. This is called the lemming mentality.

Tuesday, 25 September 2012

This article confirms that more coal fired power stations are due to be built in Europe, despite the carbon pricing schemes. How can they claim their schemes are any use when they fail in their primary objective? They are simply putting up the price of energy for no useful purpose. What a shambles!

Sunday, 23 September 2012

This article shows where the extra oil could come from if the political will is there, which boils down to who wins the race for the White House. The economy is much more likely to grow with more fuel than less.

Saturday, 22 September 2012

This article looks at the way the climate models have all been found to have failed to predict the on-going increase in levels of Antarctic ice. In fact the computer climate models have all predicted a loss of ice. How can we trust models that have failed?

Friday, 21 September 2012

If you thought China was the only nation with a massive coal-fired power station building programme, then read this article to see what India has planned. Yet more reasons why our own UK efforts to cut CO2 emissions will be completely useless at reducing atmospheric levels.

Thursday, 20 September 2012

This article gives a very good account of how the global warming scare began and how it gained so much traction across the globe, despite such weak scientific evidence. It is not a "conspiracy", but rather a conflation if disparate groups all gaining from it in their own different ways. I am putting a link to this in the side bar for reference purposes.

Wednesday, 19 September 2012

This piece on the Bishop Hill blog highlights a completely ludicrous claim made by a politician that fossil fuels receive more subsidy than renewables. To back up his claim he quotes a report by the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). He seems to ignore all the taxes that we pay for fossil fuels as well as the fact that investment in such things as wind turbines and solar panels only happen because of the massive subsidies on the energy produced. There is none so blind as those that won't look.

Monday, 17 September 2012

"All Climate Models are Wrong" is the title of an interesting blog by a young climate scientist called Dr. Tamsin Edwards. She has recently given an interview to Radio Wiltshire in which she has explained the recent behaviour of the jet stream. I recommend it to you all. Unusually, she does not claim to know all the answers - such a refreshing change from the certainty put forward by the Hockey Team (in public).

Sunday, 16 September 2012

OK I admit it, the headline was a blatant attempt at increasing the readership; but there is an important point, which is that millions of people are looking at these while the government are removing £18 billion a year from UK residents in a vain attempt to alter the world's climate and most people are unaware of it. Similar amounts are being taken from residents of other Western nations as well. I know that the Duchess's breasts have caused a great controversy, but we appear to have got our priorities all wrong if we think they are more worthy of study than the great "Climate Change Rip off". I will leave you to carry out your own "research" (you may find the link takes several attempts to work due to the massive interest, but it definitely was working).

I realise that some readers may think it is in bad taste for me to draw attention to the Royal embarrassment, though it does show a great deal of naiivety on her part to imagine that she can get away with appearing topless in any place where she is accessible to the intrusion of high-powered lenses. If you succumb to temptation, you will see that it is all a great fuss about very little - just a normal very slim girl with exactly what nature gave her. In fact the pictures may make other girls realise that they are just like her and don't need silicone enhancement to attract attention either.

Saturday, 15 September 2012

This piece from Christopher Booker in tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph reveals that Ed Davey, the Department of Energy and Climate Change Minister appears to be ready to over-rule the Climate Change Committee and give the go-ahead for Shale Gas production.

Friday, 14 September 2012

The following article is available here by Warwick hughes. I have reproduced it, as it is rather disjointed on the original site. What is interesting here is not only that there is now such a difference between the trends for the land and satellite data, but how the land data has been continually altered as each new data set has been compiled.

"Half a decade back you could make the case that trends 1979-2005 in the old land only CRUTem2 were not too different from University of Alabama at Huntsville AMSU satellite based lower troposphere trends."

LAND ONLY SURFACE TEMPERATURE RECORDS COMPARED WITH SATELLITE TEMPERATURES. (All trends in Degrees C per decade.)

1979 - 2005

UAH AMSU CRUTem2 CRUTem3 CRUTem4

Global 0.16 0.17 0.24 0.28

N Hem 0.23 0.25 0.33 0.35

S Hem 0.03 0.10 0.15 0.14

1979 – 2010

Global 0.18 0.22 0.27

N Hem 0.24 0.32 0.34

S Hem 0.06 0.12 0.13

"The introduction of the UKMet Office dominated CRUTem3 in 2006 saw the land trends 1979-2005 blow out and the just introduced CRUTem4 of Dr Phil Jones et al has increased the warming trend 1979-2010 again over the earlier CRUTems and satellites."

So the next time somebody says to you, “…well anyway the satellite temperature trends agree with the surface…”..

You should ask them to check the numbers because it simply is not so anymore.

Thursday, 13 September 2012

In this short video Piers Corbin of Weather Action explains why the real climate (as opposed to the alarmist fantasy) is going towards a "little ice age" over the coming years. No doubt the Hockey Team dismiss him as a foolish fantasist, but time will tell. Piers has a good record in predicting weather events and I would not bet against him.

Compare the above account with the alarmist clip from BBC's Newsnight. After the first part the clip shows an interview with Conservative MP, Peter Lilley and the new leader of the UK Green Party.

Wednesday, 12 September 2012

Here at last we have a scientific institution talking common sense. No less than the German Academy of Science and Engineering has come out and said that they believe that climate change is not only manageable but in fact has some advantages. Apparently the news was so shocking that four alarmist scientists have resigned.

Tuesday, 11 September 2012

Here is an important piece on WUWT which demonstrates serious shortcomings of climate models in predicting the effect of volcanic activity. The result of the study is that none of the models gave accurate predictions. If they fail in this simple test how can scientists or governments rely on them to predict the climate in the years ahead?

Saturday, 8 September 2012

This article suggests that there may be, and he is oppsed to wind farms and supports shale gas. If true, this would be a momentous day - time will tell, though even if he is he will be up against very strong opposition.

Friday, 7 September 2012

This is one of John Gummer's organisations that has caused some to think he may have a conflict of interest when advocating global warming legislation in parliament. When you actually see what is lined up in favour of alarmism.

Thursday, 6 September 2012

This report refers to recent measurements taken of the sun which confirm that it appears to be behaving in an unexpected and quiet way. It will be interesting if this has a bearing on earth's climate over the coming years.

Wednesday, 5 September 2012

The Arctic ice summer melt is giving rise to a lot of headlines in favour of global warming alarm, so now is a good time to remind readers about the past behaviour of the region. Here is some excellent research to back up claims that the Arctic ice has melted extensively in the past, in fact more than the present. So although the present melt may look alarming, we should be comforted by the fact that it has happened before, and obviously returned to a colder more frozen state again afterwards.

Sunday, 2 September 2012

Christopher Booker's column looks at yet further apparent conflicts between the MP's business interests and his role as chairman of the parliamentary climate change comittee. With all the publicity this has had it seems amazing that he is still in his post, though sadly the public are so fed up with climate change that he may get away with.

Saturday, 1 September 2012

This is the climate science equivalent of the chicken and egg question. There is plenty of evidence from ice cores etc that over the long term the CO2 lags behind temperature by several hundred years, but what about the recent decades? Is it possible to discern any lag with such small increments? This piece on WUWT blog refers to a new paper which claims to do so, and it finds that CO2 still lags behind temperature. This should be a fatal blow to the man made global warming theory, but I don't expect the thing to die quickly, there's too much money and political capital tied up for that.

Friday, 31 August 2012

This article in the German press looks at the fact that research has shown that increased efficiency does not lead to lower consumption, but rather results in greater use. It's a fascinating discovery, but also means that efficiency gains can never reduce CO2 emissions. If the alarmists accept this then the next logical step would, as the article suggests, be to introduce more direct taxes, and if that doesn't work we can expect cries for rationing. Welcome to the weird world of the green alarmists.

Thursday, 30 August 2012

This article gives the details of new research which provides clear evidence that far from amplifying warming, water vapour actually appears to provide a cooling effect on the climate. How much longer can the man made global warming theory last?

Wednesday, 29 August 2012

That is the title of the latest post by James Delingpole, which shows him at his very best taunting the pompous alarmist climate scientist, Michael Mann. I do admire Delingpole for his swashbuckling style. It is also interesting to read the comments under the article (over 800 when I looked, and still counting).

Saturday, 25 August 2012

The question in the title of this post is a very difficult one to answer as this article explains. Science is using high tech satellites, but has not yet found a foolproof way of interpreting the data. Where is the humility among scientists? Their problem (if they wish to support the alarmist position) is that any admission of a lack of certainty would lead to yet more scepticism.

Friday, 24 August 2012

This article looks at the current USA policies of subsidising green energy and compares it with the genuine free market alternatives of direct competition which have worked well in all sectors in the past.

Wednesday, 22 August 2012

This article examines the behaviour of green groups towards new projects to develop thermal energy. Apparently even though one might expect greens to welcome this fossil fuel free alternative, they do not because it involves fracking. Having already dismissed nuclear, one is left wondering whether their real objective is to ensure the lights really do go out.

Monday, 20 August 2012

Here are some notes on the recent Lecture by the Canadian statistician and climate blogger Steve McIntyre organised in London by the GWPF. By the way regular visitors to the GWPF website will have noticed that it has been offline over recent days due to being hacked by some Islamist miltant group.

Sunday, 19 August 2012

Here (at the end of the post) is a link to her lecture given recently in Melbourne where she highlights some of the finding in her recent book on the IPCC. It really opens up the severe shortcomings of that supposedly august organisation that has for so long dominated the world's debate on climate change.

Friday, 17 August 2012

Here is a great piece from MEP Roger Helmer, who has consistently talked common sense on this issue. He recently left the Conservative Party and joined the UK Independence Party over disagreements over who should succeed him, as he was considering retiring. What a good job he did not do so, as he is sorely needed on this issue of building thousands of wind turbines to replace fossil fuel power stations.

Thursday, 16 August 2012

This article discusses the recent piece on the radio 4 Today programme in which a scientists was allowed to sound the alarm about Arctic ice "disappearing" due to global warming. It turns out his claim was based on data from a satellite less than 2 years old.

Tuesday, 14 August 2012

This article how US wind farms are allowed to destroy hundreds of birds every year, while other companies are fined many thousands of pounds for unintentionally doing the same to far fewer.It seems that in a pathetic effort to "save the planet" they are in fact destroying some of its precious inhabitants.

Saturday, 4 August 2012

As this article says there seems to be a battle not only in the UK, but also in the EU between the green puritans who demand that using fossil fuels is a sin and those who recognise that without them we will be left in the industrial slow lane. The USA is the role model on how to make use of home-produced fossil fuel, and the UK and the EU can see the sense of following suite.

Wednesday, 1 August 2012

Christopher Booker explains how this has been announced in as obscure a fashion by the government. There has been no public admission, of course, but reality is slowly dawning even among the government.

Tuesday, 31 July 2012

James Lovelock, the father of environmentalism and inventor of the "Gaia Theory" seems to have reached some new conclusions regarding wind turbines, shale gas and nuclear power among others. Read this article gives the details. It was passed to me and although it was written in June, I think it is still worth a read.

Sunday, 29 July 2012

Read the paper here on WUWT Blog. This is a ground-breaking study using the latest understanding of surface temperature measurement. I predict it will not appear in our TV news bulletins which will continue to be filled with the Olympics.

Overseas readers of this blog may at this point be asking who is Tim Yeo? He is the MP who chairs the House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee and according to this article by James Delingpole he needs to declare a few interests that seem to be in conflict with his role.

Saturday, 28 July 2012

This article in the Telegraph shows the pitfalls of relying on a battery-powered vehicle. In this case it was the mayor of Brighton, the only council in the country where the GreenParty has a share of power.

Thursday, 26 July 2012

This piece looks in detail at the climate trends for the UK and despite the warmists dire warning of disruptive patterns emerging of heat waves, floods and drought, there is no such pattern in the actual record.

Wednesday, 25 July 2012

The UK Chancellor, George Osborne (Conservative), is at odds with the Energy and Climate Minister, Ed Davey (Liberal Democrat), according to this article on the BBC website. More splits in the coalition government.

Tuesday, 24 July 2012

The answer to that question is to be found in this research which shows it to be temperature by a short head of a few hundred years at most. Yet you will still find a number of scientists claiming that CO2 drives temperature.

Saturday, 21 July 2012

Here is a summary of a new research paper that looks at the way sea water can suddenly change its content, in particular levels of sulphates. It is an intriguing hypothesis and worthy of consideration.

Friday, 20 July 2012

This article from the GWPF explains new findings that contradict predictions made by computer climate models that as CO2 increases they expected the small warming to be amplified by an increase in water vapour. Yet another climate computer prediction that seems to proved wrong.

Wednesday, 18 July 2012

This paper looks at the way temperature records have been manipulated by statisticians. They have come up with a finding that they believe the temperature rise over the 20th century has been exaggerated. Interesting stuff!

Tuesday, 17 July 2012

This article looks at a new report from influential UK think tanks calling on the government to change course on its energy policy. Among the suggestions they make is a call to repeal the climate change act, or to suspend it, as its aim will have adverse effects on the UK economy.

Friday, 13 July 2012

This BBC report looks at the report from the UK Climate Change Committee (CCC) and the claims which seem to be based on some computer calculations made in the USA.
Below is an excellent letter to the members of the CCC by Rev Philip Foster

Dear MP

I note what your committee has released about future dangers of flooding and droughts ”due to man-made climate change• according to the BBC [this morning], who prefaced it with the usual ”scientists say•. This last remark is of course just lazy journalism. Which scientists? What are their real qualifications and expertise? Who is paying them?

Prof. Richard Lindzen (Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate at
MIT) states:
That the promotion of alarm does not follow from the science, is clearly illustrated by the following example.
According to any textbook on dynamic meteorology, one may reasonably conclude that in a warmer world, extratropical storminess and weather variability will actually decrease.

The reasoning is as follows. Judging by historical climate change, changes are greater in high latitudes than in the tropics. Thus, in a warmer world, we would expect that the temperature difference between high and low latitudes would diminish. However, it is precisely this difference that gives rise to extratropical large-scale weather disturbances. Moreover, when in Boston on a winter day we experience unusual warmth, it is because the wind is blowing from the south.
Similarly, when we experience unusual cold, it is generally because the wind is blowing from the north.

The possible extent of these extremes is, not surprisingly, determined by how warm low latitudes are and how cold high latitudes are. Given that we expect that high latitudes will warm much more than low latitudes in a warmer climate, the difference is expected to diminish, leading to less variance.
Nevertheless, we are told by advocates and the media that exactly the opposite is the case, and that, moreover, the models predict this (which, to their credit, they do not) and that the basic agreement discussed earlier signifies scientific agreement on this matter as well.

Clearly more storms and greater extremes are regarded as more alarming than the opposite. Thus, the opposite of our current understanding is invoked in order to promote public concern.
Clearly your 'scientists' don't understand meteorology, which, sadly, would make sense if they are from the Met Office. They are advocates for the alarm about CO2. As has been observed, it is hard to make someone understand something when their job depends on them not understanding it.

Thursday, 12 July 2012

That is according to this report from the excellent GWPF. Again we find evidence that our current climate is not unprecedented and if CO2 wasn't responsible for past warmer periods, why should it be causing any present warming?

Tuesday, 10 July 2012

You might think that low oil prices would be good news all round, but not of course for those nations producing it, who apparently according to this article have got so used to the high price that they will struggle to cope if it continues to drop. My answer to them would be - Tough, get used to falling wealth like the rest of us".

Monday, 9 July 2012

Senior Conservative MP, John Redwood, has written an open letter to the newly appointed Director General of the BBC. It is very encouraging to see a senior MP who is prepared to publically stand up for those who take an alternative view of the climate change/global warming issue.

Saturday, 7 July 2012

This article looks at a new paper which claims to prove that increased cloud cover will cool the earth. It seems a logical conclusion that accords with everyone's experience in every day life, and yet the climate alarmists claim the opposite. A very upside down view in my opinion.

Friday, 6 July 2012

This paper looks at solar activity, which some scientists claim points to a repeat of the Maunder Minimum, when frost fairs were held on the Thames. The conclusion in the paper points to a more normal kind of temperature for the globe. Neither warming nor cooling.

Thursday, 5 July 2012

So how does this year's weather compare with the past in the UK? This article gives us the Met Office records and compares. From what it says I conclude it's definitely wet, but not unique by any means - we have a wide range of weather, which is why we spend so much time talking about it!

Tuesday, 3 July 2012

This article gives an up to date look at where the UK shale gas story has reached. While things are looking very encouraging on the ground (or rather under it) the political resolve seems to be lagging somewhat behind.

Friday, 29 June 2012

Thursday, 28 June 2012

This article in the Toronto Sun looks at what has come out of the recent Rio+20 Climate Conference and concludes it is the dying phase of the recent obsession over global warming. Although I suspect they are right there is still a lot of damage being caused by the policies already enacted. This religion is going to take a long time to die.

Wednesday, 27 June 2012

This article gives an excellent insight into the workings of the IPCC. How much longer will the media and the politicians take it seriously?
The following quote from the article neatly sums up the situation, "So it doesn’t matter if total waffle is produced by unheard of academics, on the instruction of Western NGOs and advocacy organisations… The next IPCC report will produce politically correct science, which must surely be nearly as good as ‘truth’. So will this let Greenpeace smuggle its agenda into AR5, on the basis of ‘positive discrimination’? We’ll have to wait and see."

Tuesday, 26 June 2012

Roger Helmer's excellent blog post looks at the abundance of methane hydrates as a source of methane. It is a reality that no nation can ignore, and a much more realistic contribution than wind power.
This blog also referred to this here

Monday, 25 June 2012

Here is a reminder from the GWPF website just how way out the computer models of the Met Office are this year. No doubt they will tell us that weather and climate are different and they are rubbish at the former but brilliant at the latter. But why should we believe them?

Saturday, 23 June 2012

This piece from the Telegraph looks at the agreement coming from the latest environmental conference of world governments being held in Cancun. It finds that the agreement is considered "weak" by the environmental lobby, which is good news for the rest of us, though clearly disappointing for our Deputy PM, Nick Clegg. He, of course, is the leader who promised students no tuition fees, and then went on to back much higher fees - so much for his word.
So let us rejoice.
For more on the talks go here

Friday, 22 June 2012

This article shows what has become of the Golden State as increasing bureaucracy and taxation, many of them to follow the green agenda, has whittled away its natural advantages of the pioneering spirit. It is now privatising its national parks which for the environmentalists must be the equivalent of selling the family silver.

Wednesday, 20 June 2012

This article by Prof Bob Carter clearly and succinctly points out the weakness of the peer review process for scientific articles. It shows clearly that we should not regard peer review as some sort of gold standard.

Monday, 18 June 2012

This article looks at the way the government lobbyists are actually charities funded largely by the government. It's all a massive merry-go-round using taxpayers money to fund those lobbying the government to do what it intends to do anyway.

In theory at least Oregon State University (OSU) seems to
be a bastion of academic freedom, diversity, and tolerance. A wide range of
ideas are openly discussed. The most viable rise to the top and the least
viable fade away. But it is all a fairy tale, because OSU operates under a
politically correct regimen that dictates what is acceptable to say and what is
not. Transgressors who dare to be different are eventually weeded out so that
the campus maintains its ideological purity.

OSU is not yet as swift or efficient as the Soviet system
when Joseph Stalin was trying to quash dissent among biologists who refused to
go along with Trofim Lysenko. If warnings to compromise their integrity were
not followed, Stalin simply had biologists shot. That quickly thinned the ranks
of all biologists and persuaded the remaining ones to comply with Stalin's
wishes. Of course, it also destroyed Soviet biology, because Lysenko was
pedaling nonsense. And Russian biology has never recovered.

We learned over the weekend that chemist Nickolas Drapela,
PhD has been summarily fired from his position as a "Senior Instructor" in the
Department of Chemistry. The department chairman Richard Carter told him that
he was fired but would not provide any reason. Subsequent attempts to extract a
reason from the OSU administration have been stonewalled. Drapela appears to
have been highly competent and well-liked by his students. Some have even taken
up the fight to have him reinstated.

What could possibly have provoked the OSU administration
to take precipitous action against one of their academics who has been on their
staff for ten years, just bought a house in Corvallis, and has four young
children (one with severe medical problems)? Dr. Drapela is an outspoken critic
of the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, the official religion of the
State of Oregon, the Oregon Democratic Party, and Governor John Kitzhaber.

Five years ago, Oregon State Climatologist George Taylor
went around quietly saying that he was not a believer. Then Governor Ted
Kulongoski and many faculty at OSU including Dr. Jane Lubchenco made life
impossible for Taylor, and he retired. (Lubchenco is now head of NOAA in the
Obama administration.) Under those currently in charge, OSU climate research
has grown to be a huge business, reportedly $90 million per year with no real
deliverables beyond solid academic support for climate hysteria. A small army
of researchers ponder the effects of Global Warming on all sorts of things from
tube worms living along the Oregon Coast to butterflies inland. When the
climate refuses to warm (as it has for the last twenty years), they just study
'warming in reverse!' Most of us call that "cooling," but they are very careful
not to upset their Obama administration contract monitors with politically
incorrect terminology.

Skeptics of Global Warming who oppose the OSU approach and
oppose the politicians who make it all possible but do not work for OSU also
find themselves attacked. Dr. Art Robinson who is running against Peter DeFazio
for an Oregon Congressional seat found three of his children under attack at
OSU. All were attempting to obtain advanced degrees in the Nuclear Engineering
Department and were threatened with dismissal. Because Robinson fought back, we
understand that the OSU administration backed down.

As to the latest victim of political correctness at OSU,
Dr. Nickolas Drapela gives us an excellent synopsis of what is going on:

"The fact of the matter is that it is now two weeks since
I was fired and no one has had the cajones or the common courtesy to even tell
me why. I have spoken with the Dept. Chair (Rich Carter) who fired me, and he
refused to tell me why. I spoke to the Dean of Science (Vince Remcho) and he
couldn't tell me why. I spoke to HR who set up a meeting with me, then
cancelled it an hour before. Then I went to the Vice President of Academic
Affairs (Becky Warner) and she sent me back to Rich Carter, the chemistry chair.

It's just a sad, sad state of affairs that an institution
like OSU would fire a good employee for (ostensibly) no reason and then run
around and hide from the person they fired. I had stellar teaching evaluations,
I won College of Science awards for teaching, and published textbooks. My class
sections were always full and I was well-liked by students (see
ratemyprofessors.com). I was doing my job very well. But I guess I didn't
march in step with their philosophies.

There were quite a few student protests over this at OSU
(Barometer, Facebook, etc.) but to no avail.

I was given no severance and had no warning this was about
to happen. In fact, I was lured into the chair's office under the guise of a
fallacious story before being fired.

As you know, I was probably the most visibly-outspoken
critic of the Global Warming doctrine at OSU. I gave several public talks on
the topic and did research in the area which I regularly posted on the web. I
was also on a few talk radio shows in the area. I think they finally just said,
we can't have this.

Can it be that a university whose motto is "Open minds.
Open doors" cannot abide even one faculty member who disagrees with their dogma?
I suppose I am too naive, but I'm still reeling from it. Unbelievable.

I should say that they regularly read all my email
communications, which is why I am writing from this private email address. That
has been going on for quite some time now.

As far as my options at this point, like I said I haven't
even really grasped what has just happened. I don't know what I'm going to do,
or what options I have yet. I'm sure OSU wants their story to be tight and
perfectly identical among all administration before coming out with an official
reason why I was fired, hence the long wait and refusal to speak to me.

I truly thank you for your concern, and I hope there is
some recourse, even just for the sake of exposing what is happening at OSU."

In a separate e-mail Drapela went on to say:

"Thanks so much for your support and your concern. That's
really nice. My students were all really upset about it. They started an email
writing campaign to have me re-hired but I guess no one cares what they think.

I find that the people who want to keep things secret all
the time are usually the people that have something to hide. It is certainly ok
by me for you to disseminate this story. But I'm sure OSU would be horrified.

I'm not sure how I will support my family at this point.
We just bought a house in Corvallis. I have four kids, one of whom has a rare,
blood disorder and requires regular trips to Doernbecher's Children's Hospital
for treatment. Now we will be without health insurance."

We can only speculate as to how the decision to fire
Drapela was made. Unlike the decision to force Taylor out (which came from the
governor's office), this decision was likely internal to OSU with the implicit
backing of Governor Kitzhaber and NOAA administrator Lubchenco. I would suspect
that Dr. Phil Mote (Director of their Climate Change Research Institute) had a
hand in the decision, because he has previously been highly intolerant of those
who oppose his ideas and could potentially threaten his business empire.

Please join with me in supporting Nick Drapela. Please
join with me in supporting objective science, as well as academic freedom,
diversity, and tolerance. The issues here go far beyond just Global Warming and
strike at the very heart of who we are as scientists and Americans.

Gordon J. Fulks, PhD (Physics) Corbett, Oregon USA

P.S. Please circulate this e-mail far and wide. The world
needs to know what is going on here.

Translate

Remember when our leaders told us they were certain that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction? They are the same people who now say CO2 emissions will cause catastrophic weather. Politicians tell us what they want us to believe.

WELCOME TO A SANE LOOK AT CLIMATE SCIENCE

"Global warming" could be the most costly scare story in the history of man. It is hysterical alarm built on exaggeration and deceit, fuelled by those with a vested interest.Please use the search facility at the top left of the site to find specific articles among over 3800 on the site. Some suggested key topics: clouds, biofuels, hurricanes, windpower, global cooling, emissions, arctic, antarctic, zero carbon, stars, aussies, china, sun, Gore, schools, IPCC, NIPCC, climate models, hockey stick, trust in science.

ARGUMENTS THAT NO WARMIST CAN WIN

Below are two irrefutable arguments that should be top of any climate sceptic's list.

RECENT GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RECORD

Click here. To see a graph of both surface and satellite temperature; or here for satellite temperature record. Here for satellite records of various sections of the globe. Google Earth global temperatures are here

Followers

SIGN THE MANHATTAN DECLARATION TODAY

Sign HERE for common sense on climate. You can see the massive propaganda behind the "global warming" theory, so please stand up and be counted!

About Me

I have a BSc Honours degree in Applied Chemistry. After working in detergent research for a short while I then spent 17 years teaching science. Following that I ran my own successful property company with my wife Andrea. I am currently a New Forest District Councillor. I was involved in the campaign to try to keep Al Gore's political propaganda film out of English schools.
I have three grown up sons and six grandchildren. Three have now left school while the others are currently (2017) aged 1,7 and 9. I see them regularly and take a great interest in their education.